Setting The Benchmark
(The special extended Onfilm website dance remix.
A shorter version was published in Onfilm, October 2004.)

Jamie Selkirk talks about his various roles on the 'Lord Of The Rings' trilogy and his Oscar-winning edit of 'The Return Of The King'.

ONF: What first prompted your interest in working in the screen industry?
JS: It came purely by chance really. Unsure of what I really wanted to do when I left college, I eventually scored a job in the late '60s, initially as a studio camera cabler in the NZBC Television studios in Waring-Taylor Street, Wellington.
In those days the NZBC gave you opportunities to move on to bigger and better things fairly quickly so is wasn't long before I was operating the studio cameras. Unfortunately, I was incapacitated due to a car accident for a long period of time so the prospect of staying in that role dissipated and NZBC management offered me the more sedentary role of editing. I thought, "Wow...what's an editor do?"

What industry-related training did you do?
Absolutely none... I was thrown in the deep end. I remember my boss saying, "Here's a hot splicer, there's the film, cut these commercials into the appropriate places." That was the days when 16mm film commercials were physically cut into the television programmes to create commercial breaks, then removed the next day and slotted into the next nights viewing.
Basically it was on the job training. It wasn't long before I was cutting single system news footage, then it was on to double system documentaries. Eventually I found my niche in editing drama production and that's where I stayed for 13 years.

How and when did you get your first screen industry gig? What was it?
After several years working for television on a variety of productions, I felt I had enough experience to move on from the small screen and offer my skills up to the feature industry. I left the NZBC and started out as a freelancer. I hadn't actually worked with 35mm at that stage but, "What the heck, it's only twice the size and races across the Steenbeck editing table twice as fast… This will be a cinch."
Soooo... it took a while but, after a stuttering start and a mixture of 35mm commercials and 16mm documentaries, I was hired to edit my first feature, 'The Squeeze'. I can't imagine anyone will remember that movie but it was my first breakthrough into the feature industry - a milestone.

How do you view the editor's role in the production process?
The editor's role in New Zealand has developed over the years. There was a time when the editor was hired from the completion of the shoot and had to make do with material presented. These days the editor is very often hired during the pre-production period to work with the director during the storyboard stage and then carry on through the shoot period doing a first pass edit on the footage as it comes.
A key role for the editor through this period is to view all the dailies, checking for shot quality, focus issues, negative damage etc. More particularly, this stage gives the editor the chance to be more involved in the shot selection and direction the scene is going and the opportunity to request additional pick-up shots to enhance the dramatic content of a particular scene.
Essentially, though, the editor's role really comes into its own during post, with a collaboration developing with the director to bring out the best in the drama, the emotion and the pace that the story deserves.

What do you feel you bring to the role of editor, in terms of your personal sensibility?
I think my best attribute is my easy going approach to the role. Every department is always under pressure to deliver, and post production usually gets the thin end of the wedge as delivery never seems to get pushed - but then delivery date is delivery date, no argument.
The type of visual effect pictures I am now involved in with Peter brings new problems into the post mix. You need to be more organised, the technology changes, there are FX elements to select, FX facilities to coordinate with… The role has become more complicated and needs a level-headed approach, while still giving time to commit to the primary task at hand - editing the movie.

Prior to meeting Peter Jackson and acting as editor and sound editor on 'Bad Taste', you had obviously built a strong rep in the industry as an editor and sound editor, and since then there have been a few side projects like producing the short 'Larger Than Life'. But for the most part you've been collaborating constantly with Peter since then. What was it that most impressed you with him when you first encountered him, what led you to throwing in with him as a business partner (in Weta and Camperdown), and in your wildest imaginings did you think that within a decade of starting to work together you'd be embarking on the biggest movie project in history (and pulling it off with bells on)?
Prior to meeting up with Peter my career had been entirely focused on editing and post production aspects of the film industry. The usual story scrabbling for work, whether it be picture editing, sound editing or even negative matching (perish the thought)…
The film community had in effect been around for a while and although there was still some consistently good work being done by some excellent directors, things had become a little predictable. Pete's arrival on the scene was like a breath of fresh air.
I remember when I first met him, he was ever so excited about the prospect of someone finally giving him the time and the opportunity to prove that he had the ability to tell a story though pictures (what an understatement). His infectious sense of humour and desire to always push the envelope for the betterment of his films are traits that endear him to everyone who has been involved in his projects.
The day he received a cheque from the NZ Film Commission to complete 'Bad Taste' was the day he resigned from the 'Evening Post' and the start of his amazing ride to becoming one of the most celebrated film directors. For me, it provided the opportunity to become involved in not just editing of his movies but to partner up with him and embark on a commitment to the NZ film industry to develop facilities that have made it possible to mix it with the big boys of Hollywood and put NZ on the map.
It's been a roller coaster ride and we still have a few twists and turns to make.

Obviously you've got various levels in your relationship with Peter (business partner, personal etc) but how does the specific director-editor relationship work?
Working with Peter is a collaborative experience. A lot of directors aren't necessarily that interested in the cutting room but Pete is. He loves this part of filmmaking - it's bringing his vision together.
First up, though, is Peter's delight in seeing how many of the 'Dominion Post' daily quiz questions we can answer. I remember during the later stages of 'The Two Towers' he would first ask Mike Horton and Jabez Olssen the questions, then come into the 'Return of the King' cutting room and see if Annie Collins and I could better their score. Once that was settled it was on to the job at hand and total focus on the film.
Seriously though, I think our working relationship works because we are both enjoy the process, generally tend to select the same performance take, intuitively click our fingers at about the same cut point, and have a collective desire to keep the momentum going. I've been editing Pete's films for a while now so I must have something that works for him.

As well as being the editor of 'Return Of The King', you were both co-producer (post production) and supervising editor for the trilogy. In those supervisory roles, how did you prevent yourself from getting swamped in the logistics of the project?
I think the best thing I ever did was make the early decision not to edit all three films. That was the initial plan but as the scale of the movies increased it became very obvious that my best role was to be supervising editor on the first two films and finally edit the third.
We were fortunate in being able to call on the editing skills of John Gilbert, who did 'The Fellowship of the Ring', and Michael Horton, who edited 'The Two Towers' - Peter had actually worked with both of them once before on smaller projects.
This allowed me to do the co-producer role, which mainly involved the early budgeting of post and the follow-through of the post schedule for the whole trilogy - managing the 14 strong editorial team, liaising with Weta Digital, overseeing the negative pulling for drama and colour timing scans, and basically keeping the work flow going while keeping an eye on the first pass assembly of 'Return of the King'.
As supervising editor on the trilogy I watched all the dailies and acted as a sounding board or a fresh eye for Peter, John and Michael - sometimes you can get stuck in a sequence and then it's helpful if someone with a fresh eye comes in to suggest alternatives you may not have thought of, because you're so locked up in your own concepts. I would attend the film conform screenings of the various cut, then go back to office and bash out some notes on my thoughts about restructuring, dropping scenes, tightening or lengthening scenes etc. These notes would get to the cutting and, if not always used, were useful as a basis of discussion in the ever-evolving cut.

So how much material were you actually dealing with?
I think we probably smashed most of the records for the amount of film shot and effect shots created on one project (even though it was three films). Total amount of negative shot was approximately seven million feet, of which around 80% was printed. That's an awful lot of dailies to screen after each shooting day. The editorial assistant team very often had to contend with the synching up and preparation for screening of 40,000 feet from up to six shooting units per day, and we frequently had three or four hours to view. It was quite hilarious at times to hear the odd snore from the back of the cinema as one of the crew succumbed to the long day.
This sheer amount of footage obviously slowed the editing process - it all had to be carefully viewed again and again in the cutting room by the editor and Peter during the performance selection process prior to editing a particular scene.
In addition to the drama, we had to deal with the endless effects elements - sky plates, scenic backgrounds, miniatures, the various versions of effects shots from Weta Digital... No wonder the Avids occasionally decided to crash.
By the time we had completed the three films we had produced just under 12 hours of product (that's approx 60,300ft and a cutting ratio of 117:1), while the total digital effects shots were 740 for 'FOTR', 950 for 'TTT', and 1850 for 'ROTK'.

How did the Avid editing systems you used for the trilogy help you grapple with that volume of material?
At the beginning of the project we decided that the best Avid set-up would be to utilise the relatively new fibre channel Unity system, which enabled several Avid platforms to access the same footage at any time.
We set up three Unity systems with storage capacity of around 780 gigabytes (which we thought was going to be heaps) with six Avids attached… Essentially one Unity for each movie. This allowed us to access any shot from any of the films and was very useful as we often needed elements such as sky or landscapes shot from the earlier films.
As it turned out, we eventually had to increase our storage capacity to around 5.5 terrabytes, due to the massive increase in footage shot. This certainly put the Avids under extreme duress - after all, we were still using ABVB 7.2 systems.
Nothing was more frustrating than being in the middle of a crucial cutting session and the Avid crashing and requiring a re-boot. However they generally withstood the test of time over the four-year production period.

What were the main priorities for you when it came to editing 'The Return Of The King'?
Obviously the effects were an integral part of the film and were required to put the audience into Tolkien's world but the story was and should always be foremost in the editing process. To get the story to work you need the performance and emotion from the characters, but we had such an amazing cast that it wasn't difficult to bring out those characteristics.

What did you find most rewarding about editing The Return Of The King?
Film three was always going to be special. The characters and emotional drive had been set up well in the earlier two films; now it was up to us to deliver a film that would meet all the fans' expectations. It was a huge film - more emotion, more battle action, bigger creature action... We had to ensure that the roller coaster ride we had embarked on 4 years earlier was delivered and I reckon we achieved that.

What did you find most challenging about editing The Return Of The King?
It was always going to be a tough ask to deliver this film with the right balance of action and emotional drama. I think we achieved that by structuring the film into five acts so we could determine a clear path for the audience that ensured we weren't away from the various storylines for too long. In essence the story is driven by Frodo and Sam's journey to destroy the Ring, so it was essential this took priority.

Very belated congrats on winning the Academy Award, by the way - and a really good speech too. I take it you practiced it a few times beforehand in case your name was read out?
Thank you… Actually, I had written out a few words, mainly so that if I did win I wouldn't forget anyone's name. I didn't want to get caught short as I had the previous week when I attended the ACE (American Cinema Editor) guild awards and hadn't prepared anything to say. I had been to a pre-awards drinks get-together, had a few and, bugger me, I won the best dramatic feature award. It is indeed an honour to be recognised for your work by your peers.

What, if anything, do you remember of the walk up to the podium, receiving the award and giving the speech? (Tradition, of course, dictates that "it's all a blur"...)
Tradition reigns - it was a blur. By the time the editing award was announced the 'Return Of The King' had already picked up Oscars for all the previous nominated categories and everyone was on a high. We were on a roll - when was it going to stop?
I can only vaguely recall my name being announced but I remember standing and walking towards the stage, pausing to talk to Peter who was a couple of rows in front, and then walking up to accept the award from Julianne Moore and Pierce Brosnan.
It's a surreal sensation - all the sounds seemed dulled and indistinct. I completely forgot to do up my tuxedo jacket button and to pull my speech notes from my pocket - I just blurted out what I remembered writing down in the hotel room about three hours earlier. I heard later that I had managed to thank the remaining New Zealanders and I had spoken like a real down to earth Kiwi… Oh well!

How about meeting the press afterwards?
It was pretty interesting… Once I had departed the stage, Pierce and Julianne accompanied me out the back. We were immediately ushered into a lift and went up a floor, then walked down a series of corridors until we bumped into the sound mixing team (who had received their Oscars earlier and were only just making their way back to the auditorium), and finally burst into a blaze of camera lights flashing. It was blinding - there must have been 100 photographers all yelling, "Look this way", "No, over here", "Up the back", "Left", "Right"... I somehow think they were really wanting shots of Julianne and Pierce but who's to know - it may have been me!! After what seemed an age we were ushered out, I signed the Oscar winners huge poster, and was thrust into another room chocka with journalists. I was asked a couple of questions, I mumbled something and then it was all over. It was back to the little anteroom you had to wait in until an opportune moment to go back to your seat.

And did you get to party hearty afterwards? Any tales of Hollywood-style excess and debauchery that you'd like to share?
I think the pre-Oscar party at New Line executive Bob Shaye's amazing house up in the Hollywood Hills was true Hollywood excess. Walls dripping with artwork, actors mingling with the party hounds, Dom Perignon champagne flowing, wonderful food, and to top it all off Paris Hilton falling into a shallow rose petal-covered garden pool as she lurched over to meet Peter.
Post Oscars, we had an awesome night of revelry. Once the awards were over we went to the Governor's Ball for a bite to eat, then it was off to the TheOneRing.net party. About 2000 fans had been taking in the awards ceremony on a big screen and were waiting for our arrival. We all arrived in our limos to an amazing reception - shaking hands, signing autographs etc. Then we emerged on stage to a blaze of popping flashbulbs as the fans scrambled to get photos of the team. It was awesome… now I know how it must have felt when the Beatles turned up for a gig.
Then it was off to the New Line Cinema party: more drinks, more food. Press photographers everywhere. Finally in the wee hours we all turned up back at the Four Seasons hotel, raided our mini bars and squeezed in PJ's apartment. It was absolutely amazing as we all entered and lined up our Oscars on the lounge table… 27 in all - now that's gotta be a first.

So where do you keep Oscar?
It moves around a bit but generally sits proudly alongside my American Cinema Editors award on the shelf in the lounge.

Has the win had an impact on your day-to-day working life thus far?
Not at all… I don't expect it will. I can't imagine that I would ever take up any job offers overseas (if offered). I am dedicated to working here in New Zealand, especially Wellington.

How about your personal life (eg, do you get to refuse to do the dishes on the basis of being an Oscar winner)?
My family and friends think its cool to know someone that has an Oscar on the shelf but other than that nothing's changed.

What's been the best aspect of working on the 'LOTR' films (in all your various roles)?
I don't think there has any one role that has out-shone another. Just being part of this amazing journey was something you'd never forget. It was six years of my life following through a production from the early days - when it was going to be first one film, then two films, and finally the trilogy - to the completion of what has become one of the box office successes of all time.
Then there's being part of a fantastic team effort and the amazing, skilled and dedicated editorial crew I worked with…
Assembly editor and Avid operator Annie Collins was essential to both myself and the team - she put together a first assembly of 'ROTK', was my hands in the cutting room and did a fantastic job.
First assistant Peter Skarratt kept the team together out the back and developed an excellent database package for the project. Jenny Vial, FX editor and coordinator extraordinaire.
Jo Priest, FX editor - couldn't have done it without her.
Mark Hawthorne, FX editor/picture/sound change assistant, who also did frame counts for Gollum dialogue animation.
And then there's Megan, Dave, Ian, Heather, Michelle, Alan, Brett…

What's your favourite part of 'The Return Of The King' in terms of what you were able to achieve with your editing, and which sequence was most fun?
My favourite sequence has to be the build up to the destruction of the Ring in Mount Doom. Although it was scripted as several different scenes, we wanted it to feel as one: a seamless inter-cutting of the final determined struggle of Frodo and Sam up the slopes of Mount Doom; Aragorn's battle at the Black Gates; Gollum's attack on Frodo and Sam; the destruction of the Ring; Sauron's empire collapsing, and finally Frodo and Sam being rescued by Gandalf from the lava covered rocks. The final icing on the cake was Howard Shore's amazing score, which bound it all together into an extremely emotional sequence.
As far as fun sequences go, I suppose the Pelennor Fields battle, from the attack by the Orcs and Nazguls to Theoden's charge and ending up with Mumak battle. This was always going to be fun purely because of the sheer scale of the battles and Peter's re-visualisation. There was always much amusement in the cutting room when we were discussing all the cool shots that we could turnover to Weta. I remember many occasions when the FX supervisors and animators would look at us with stunned amazement as we asked for yet another FX shot, knowing full well that there was little or no time left to deliver. Nevertheless, they did deliver, and splendidly.

How about the extended DVD version of The Return Of The King - is there anything in particular you're glad to see back in the film? (And am I right in thinking it's 50 minutes longer than the theatrical cut, with 300 new effects shots?)
Although I felt the feature version was about right for length, there are always some scenes that are hard to remove from the cut.
Our first cut of 'ROTK' was nearly four-and-a-half hours long, so obviously we had to drop a lot of scenes. It's always the back story and character stuff that tends to be removed in the interests of progressing the story, so when it comes to the DVD version it's usually character development scenes that go back in. You'll just have to wait until the DVD extended version is released to check out the additions and, yes, the DVD version is around 50 minutes longer.

And you're now editing away on 'King Kong'. Is it a relief to have finally left Middle Earth for Skull Island?
Yes, it's really great to be doing something different - and it's only one film! Unfortunately no less complex than 'LOTR' but it has a completely different feel about it. Being involved in just the editing, with no worries about the other production departments, is great.

It's going to be pretty tight to hit the December 2005 release date isn't it - given the extensive effects shots etc - or doesn't that seem particularly challenging after the LOTR experience?
We'll make it… As you say, nothing seems hard now we have 'LOTR' under our belts.

What advice do you have for anyone who wants to be an editor?
As with any role in the film industry it's really hard to get your foot in the door. Most of the young people who approach me are unsure of exactly what they want to do. They just want to be in the film industry - "Let me come and watch", "I'll work for free"... Unfortunately, these days its difficult to give such people those opportunities. In the days when we cut with film the opportunities to learn were far easier, as you could start as a trim filer or edge numberer and you would be in the cutting room with the editor watching the techniques used and how the story was created by editing. These days the footage is digitised in the back room, and there's hardly any contact with the editor. There are no trims to file - the editor does his own file management. So it's really hard to learn.
It comes down to perseverance - learn as much as possible about the different digital editing set-ups, keep your ear to the ground for an opportunity to impress and eventually you'll get that break.

What's the best tip about the craft of editing you've ever received?
Gee, this is a tough one - I don't think I ever received any tips. Essentially it's always thinking of the story and how that can be altered or enhance through the performances of the actors.

Anything else you'd like to mention?
Editing is one of those jobs you can always enjoy - it's always a lot of fun.
It's really rewarding, to be chopping away until you think it's really great and then screening it with a lot of people around you who don't know the background.
My biggest thrill is when you get the reaction you were hoping to get. Then you feel you have achieved something and that's what it is all about.

© Copyright Onfilm magazine,
October 2004 www.onfilm.co.nz